History shows the primary turnout doesn’t guarantee a victory in the election

Posted June 2, 2008 2:56 PM

by Peter Brown

In presidential campaigns, as on Wall Street, the phrase "this time is different" elicits skepticism among practitioners who may want to believe, but understand the lessons of history.

Traders worry about stocks that rise too far, too fast, because they fear the dreaded market correction. Political pros question a recently successful strategy that does not jibe with the record of the past.

Let's be clear: Sen. Barack Obama may indeed be different from most politicians. Not only will he be the first African-American nominee of a major U.S. political party, but also he is truly gifted with rare communications skills and charisma.

At the same time, he is betting the White House on the same Democratic demographic strategy that has given us a variety of Republican presidents over the past generations.

Ever since reformers seized control of the Democratic Party in the 1970s, most of their presidential candidates - that is, the losing ones - have based their game plan not on winning more of the existing electorate but on increasing the pool with new voters who lean their way.

This led to frequent internal warfare about whether the millions of Democrats and independents who voted for Ronald Reagan were worth chasing if that meant trimming the party's ideological sails.

Sen. Obama brought out millions of new voters -- most black, white liberals and young -- attracted by his persona, his calls for change and a voting record the nonpartisan National Journal rated as the most liberal in the U.S. Senate for 2007.

And we have noone to blame but the DNC! Bunch of cowards afraid of the Clintons. This race was over mathematically for a long time. The media had its reasons for continuing (money), but not the DNC. And when Hillary saw it slipping away from her, she wisely (like a slithering serpent) grasped two constituencies for herself - dividing the party. Ever since then her campaign has been about two constitiuencies: White voters and Feminists. And now she has them in her pocket and she is using them for leverage. The DNC should have made ALL of their Superdelegates commit to Barack Obama and close this race. Clinton is NOT going to line up, and neither is she going to line up her voters. Harold Ickies showed her hand at the seating committee and on meet the press Saturday. He spoke of NOTHING about party unity. And after her Puerto Rico victory (aka adios Clinton), she spoke nothing about conceeding. She is going to stay in it until August. And that is because the DNC NEVER brought the proper pressure on her. And now she has her 1.7mil. voters (hilarious) standing defiantly against the will of the party. UN-UNIFIED. And now what is Barack to do? He can't even declare himself the winner even if he clinches on Tuesday or Wednesday. All because of the DNC allowing the Clintons to divide and conquer. And now Barack has to have a fake ceremony, and prepare to be the presumptive nominee. Its terrible. Good ratings for everyone, but terrible. And all of this "excitement" is going to be like sex without a climax. DNC is weak and unorganized. McCain and his folks are organized and focussed on Barack. I guess they have to pick our nominee for us! Sickening.

Obama has assembled the biggest group of radicals I have ever seen. Starting with Rezko, Nadmi Auchi, Ali Ata, the Mahajans, Louis Farakhan, William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Father Pfleger. Frankly, I think he asked Pfleger to give that big sermon because he wanted quit Trinioty Church. he's a Chicago politician I expect tosay anything for him to be elected.Jerry White, Springfield, IL

George: And just what do you find objectionable about him? He has a wonderful education, knows, taught, and WILL UPHOLD the Constitution, compared to the 4000-plus who are no longer with us thanks to the invasion of Iraq, the total disregard for the people of New Orleans, the Patriot Act, our country going further in debt BY THE DAY, LACK OF RESPECT BY MUCH OF THE WORLD, TAX BREAKS FOR THE RICH THAT ARE VERY DISPROPORTIONATE TO THE REST OF US,ETC., ETC.!!! If you're referring to his acquaintances, THEY ARE NOT HIM! Compare what you are SURMISING about Obama compared to WHAT WE KNOW about the current administration!!! Do you want to be a Third World country because we owe China our indebtedness for GENERATIONS???

If Hillary AND BILL mess up Obama's chance, they might as well head back to the hills of ARKANSASS (MISSPELLED INTENTIONALLY) because they will be so despised that their days in DC will for all intents and purposes BE OVER!!! That vindictive stuff might be ok during good times, but we haven't seen THOSE for a long time, thanks in great part to Clinton's signing of NAFTA...IF SHE INTENTIONALLY WITHHOLDS HER SUPPORT TO KEEP HIM FROM WINNING AND THINGS KEEP GOING TO HELL AS THEY HAVE BEEN, BLAME THE CLINTONS!!!...OF COURSE, BEING MILLIONAIRES, THEY COULDN'T CARE LESS!!!

I think against any other Republican Obama would be a shoe in or any other Democrat for that matter. However McCain is a different animal. He does even better with Independants than Obama does. With how awful the GOP is doing nationally for McCain to be tied or leading Obama in every poll is a miracle. Just proves how strong of a candidate McCain is. Independents such as myslef know that McCain is one of the few who will do what is best for the country and not just toe the party line. Also what Daschle is saying about him makes the DNCs, another 4 years of Bush, claims just plain dumb and only the hard core partisan Dems are buying that argument. Anyone that knows anything about McCain knows that him and Bush are about as opposite as 2 members of the same party can be. As someone who is very skeptical towards most Republicans I have no problem backing McCain after backing Kerry in 2004. The guy has survived the biggest test ever thrown at a presidential candidate. Being a POW for 6 years in Vietnam is the worst thing anyone can face in any lifetime. After facing and living thru that everything else he might face as president pails in comparison to that test he passed. My hope is that the Democrats will get huge gains in both the House andd Senate and McCain will be president. Both sides then can work together for the good of the country. That way neither the far right or far left will have any control over the US Government. We have seen Obamas candidacy a million times before. Government is the answer to everything for these people. As someone who can be described as a Reagen Democrat, it will be an honor for this former Marine to cast a vote for a man with a legacy like McCains. I voted for Obama in IL for the Senate but that was before we knew much about him. Had Huckabee or Romney won I would not be voting at all. I like both Hillary and McCain for different reasons. I am an independant and I support John McCain.

Yes, truly gifted with rare communications skills and charisma... but nothing to say. The man is as hollow as a lightbulb.
Unfortunately for the Messiah, relying on his legions of new voters is a fools paradise. They tend not to vote. Just ask Kerry. The people he has to win over -- the famous swing vote -- want practical solutions to specific problems. Obama fails there.
These voters also tend to dislike being dismissed as stupid or unsophisticated or racist... go figure. They also wisely judge candidates by the company they keep... Obama has the likes of Rezko, Stroger and the Daleys, not to mention Wright and Pfleger.
Bye-bye Barack.

WE WERE "WELCOMED" AS LIBERATORS!
WE WERE "WRONG" BUT YET WE WERE OF MEN!
WE WERE "WRONG" BUT YET WE WERE IN THE MIDDLE!
WE WERE "BUSH" APPEASERS" WRONG, BUT THEN RIGHT!
WE WERE CHENEY "APPEASERS" WRONG, AND WRONG AGAIN!
WE ARE THE CROSSOVERS, WE ARE THE CROSSOVERS, WE CARE, BUT WE DON'T, BUT WE DO, BECAUSE WE ARE THE CROSSOVERS, WE ARE THE CROSSOVERS!
ISTOOK, WE TOOK, ISTOOK, ABRAMOFF TOOK, DOOLITTLE TOOK, DICK CHENEY TOOK, WE TOOK, DOOLITTLE TOOK, JOHN MCCAIN TOOK, RICK RENZI TOOK. BECAUSE WE ARE THE CROSSOVERS, WE ARE THE CROSSOVERS, FROM HERE OR THERE, WE ARE THE CROSSOVERS!
ON OF THE BEST THINGS TTHAT HAPPENED TO AMERICA!
WE THE "APOSTLES OF APPEASEMENT"
CAN WE GIVE GEORGE PRESCOTT BUSH, ANOTHER 4 YEARS IN THE MCCAIN, MCSAME WHITE HOUSE?

Post a comment

(Anonymous comments will not be posted. Comments aren't posted immediately. They're screened for relevance to the topic, obscenity, spam and over-the-top personal attacks. We can't always get them up as soon as we'd like so please be patient. Thanks for visiting The Swamp.)